Whatever is the issue about the citizenship of Myanmar , why should people living in Burma be subject to Genocide.
Common guys who support Myanmers Govt backed torture of Rohingus, you are killing people whether they are muslims or not and importantly unarmed.
People get enriched with education and becomes more tolerant but look at the civil society of Myanmar and the Noble peace prize winner Aung San Suu Kyinot not to mention the unsofisticated Myanmar Armies, how they are reacting to the Genocide !!! they are indirectly supporting the murders of innocent unarmed Royinga women and children !
Unbelievable to think how savageous these people can be to ignor the mass killing.
Rohinga Muslim will become future terrorist is their lame excuse to justify the killing ? I don't think so !
Even the animals in the Jungle don't kill their own species the way Rakhines are killing the Rohingus ! backed by the Govt. Shameful !and disgraceful . The muslim countries only doesn't have the responsibility to save these Rohinga women and children, but it is the duty of the civilized world to protect them.I would expect UN to protest the Genocide and declare Myanmer as a illegal country if they don't apologize for the Genocide and compensate for the damage they have doen to the Rohingus.

To me it seems fair that Myanmar allows Naturalised Citizenship to those people who want it.
Of course, in the process they must learn the local language, which is reasonable.
After all, we in Australia even have a requirement for English for new migrants.
So why have these people not bothered to acquire that skill?
Are they 'not the full sandwich'?
These people are not born before 1848, nor have they applied for Naturalised citizenship. Bangladesh does not want them. Malaysia is pushing their boats back into the water.
Why is it unfair for them to acquire Naturalized Citizenship ?
Why should they have to change the laws in this country whilst places like Saudi Arabia do not even accept people born in Saudi Arabia, as citizens of that country?
Why, also, have these Islamic countries NOT signed the Refugee Convention of the UN?
In cases like this that signature becomes very important.
Maylaysia and Saudi Arabia come to mind.

Through this blog, I have been called a liar, a b**strd,an extremist, and a primitive.

I could be!

However ask some one to point out my lies, and there is silence.
I am probably no more an extremist then the rakhines.
They are on the ground, having felt it for 150 years, and Me- I am just guessing what they may have gone through, to bring a normally peaceful people, to this point of hatred.

I am happy to argue, rationally with anyone as to where I have been lying.
If I have, I will apologise and withdraw such a statement.

I speak up because no-one else speaks up.
I am, in Sharia, only an animal. I want to stay an animal.
At least Femi is still a half-wit.
Animals find it hard to show compassion to humans.
The Rohingyas are human.

So Saudi's are no better than the Burmese junta, SO???? So torturing Muslim minorites are justified because in Muslim majority places they do the same??
Sorry to say you are a pathetic loser. Don't bother to hide behind fairness while in all utternes you are not succeding. Just come out and say you hate Mulsims, that way I'll maybe take you seriously.

guest-iniselein reply to Bharat ppNov 8th, 12:50
So Saudi's are no better than the Burmese junta, SO???? So torturing Muslim minorites are justified because in Muslim majority places they do the same??
Sorry to say you are a pathetic lose.

besides your words of abuse - Yiu have not answered a single challenge of mine.
You have a right to comment, when you loudly and clearly protest against the Sudan Brutes - who have been so Genocidal.

Or when you clearly ask the Egyptian Government to give their minorities equal rights , or you protest against the citizenship requirements of Saudi Arabia and Yemen.

guest-iniselein reply to Bharat ppNov 10th, 15:11
No, you will have credibility when you speak out against the Israeli atrocities, plight of the Kashmiris
...
This is the silly one - I have actually spoken out against the Israelis.

And as for the Kashmiris - Sholuld I speak out against their killing or otherwise of 400,000 Hindu Kashmiris?]

The only other place you see such brutality is in Islamic Countries.

And you- are silly enough to want me to speak out against these Muslim Kashmir atrocities.

Incidentally this newspaper did not speak out against those atrocities either, as you did not, and still ignore, and yet they are recorded history.

I say to every body here, or at least the ones who are able to analyse.

The Myanmar are tolerant and accepting people, as are most Buddhists every where.

Any argument in that direction is spurious.

The second argument that no-one seems to mention is the 'Fifth Column' arguments. These Islamic people meet all the requirements of people who support a fifth column. A lot of them, will, in the future,support any Islamic terrorist organisation that is supported by a 'Fifth Column.'

The evidence is very obvious, and no-one should ask for it. I would say that Myanmar may be somewhat anti-Islam , but is very tolerant towards all the others.
All they want to do, is to avoid a future 'Fifth Column'

It is terrible that These people have not been accepted by anyone.
It has also changed our image of Aung Sang sue chi.
Is this the time to find fault? I don't think so.
The truth is that the Burmese people do not want them.
The People of Bangladesh, are themselves too heavily populated, and really they need to go to an Islamic country to get accepted well.
They would blend well into most Islamic countries, and that would bring a happy end to their plight.
Our eyes should be looking at Indonesia, or Malaysia, or perhaps one of the Gulf states. Iran has enough space. All the central Asian Countries have a lot of Space too. Perhaps Afghanistan or Pakistan may be good for them.
It is important that where ever they go they are accepted well by those people.
Why can't we all be more sympathetic to these people?
There are only a million of them.

In life one sees a lot of horror. Too often it is overtaken by politics.
Often one notices that the good is not seen as easily as the horror.
This is now happening in Myanmar.

I see it as a good place from the past. I see that the Rohingyas dug a hole when had an uprising.
Should one allow them to lie in it?

If not, then should one face past horrors that could have been stopped?
Such as Rwanda? where the French had enough Muscle and influence to stop the slaughter.
Is it okay for us to say nothing when Russia bombs Chechenya to bits?

Why are we always so quite when nasty things happen to people, and it remains unpublicised?

Is it okay for us to criticize here, and keep quite there? And if it is, why is it?

I wonder what response one would get if the same people who said the Rohingyas aren't Burmese citizens were asked about the citizenship of the assorted non-Buddhist hill peoples? If this is a thinly-disguised religious bias, the Rohigyas won't be the last victims.

The persecution of Romanies is a good comparison. Those people also lack an established homeland and resist assimilation. They, too,are being subjected to racial hatred and persecution. What happened in Northern Ireland is a disgrace to Ireland people and both the civil society in Ireland and international bodies such as Amnesty have condemned the attacks. The only dissimilarity with Rohingyas is that, the Rohingyas fail to get any sympathy from Myanmar civil society, which I assume, is subject to propaganda and threat from military government.

I guess the religious culture of Rohingyas do clash quite a bit with the Burmese cultures... Burmese aren't known for inclusion/acceptance, as is evident with Karen and other secessionist movements ... However, the Rohingyas don't appear to be a sublissive small minority and therefore come off as a threat - A friend of mine commented that the religious/cultural fear/intolerance was intentionally cultivated by central govenment to create a permanant fissure and thereby check any possible future disagreement with state government. This sounds plausible rakhaines themselves are not in a comfortable relationship with the mainstream Burmese.

mahmuda97in reply to feline74Nov 4th, 19:45
I guess the religious culture of Rohingyas do clash quite a bit with the Burmese cultures... Burmese aren't known for inclusion/acceptance, as is evident with Karen and other secessionist movements.
....
Mahmud.. It goes beyond their religiosity.

If you don't think that it is Islam that is a problem, then you are turning a blind eye towards
*Thailand
*The Phillipines
*Sudan
*Somalia
*India + Pakistan
*Central Asia
*Chechnya
*Egypt

You also forget that in Sharia law - the Burmese and the lady are taken as animals. Not worthy.

Why would any one accept that???
Gandhi protested against that in South Africa.

Really, the communist polity quarantines citizen’s thoughts and outlook. An instance is Burma. The comity of states should spurn all immigration ties with Burma until resuscitation. Its draconian immigration policy causes pogroms – shedding blood. Burma is still not regarded as spectacular country for the tramps in the other parts of the world to immigrate.

Wow, more wonderful democracy; how is it working out. Funny how the evil military dictatorship kept a lid on this situation, but when you give the common people power; well, we can see what happens. And what about Aung San Suu Kyi; I thought see was a “human rights” activist and stood for justice and fairness; I guess she showed her true colors; I wonder, does the Economist now regret supporting her. Silly Westerners with their fetish for democracy, how many countries have to stagnate and how many lives have to be ruined before they learn not to meddle in other peoples business.

Burmese people are pushing this myth of Rohingyas being Bangladeshi origin. It's true that some Bangladeshi people cross over to India because the economic opportunity there is better. The Rohingyas in Burma are in such horrible condition. Why would anyone want to go there from the Muslim-majority areas of Bangladesh?
Every post-British country is plauged with some people that falls neither here nor there. The Chtiggaong border was especially fuzzy, with people moving in and out, just as the chittagong hill tracts border. A lot of the ethnic minorities there trace their origin back to Burma. Bangladesh also has a small Rakhaine population. We are not pushing any of them back.
The Rohingya have shared historical connection and I guess even origin in Chittagong just like people have with along the Indian borders, but they were living for at least a couple of generation in Arakan when the borders were drawn. They don't even speak like the Chittagonian people, their dialect is distictly Arakanese, as is their culture (e.g. dress up).
Bangladesh government's reluctance to accept any more push-ins from Burma for fear of disturbance is justified. Any refugee population is a source of threat for the local population.

From human right perspective,I personally agree to give citizenship who was born and grown up here even though their gran not settled here before 1948. Their responsibility is try to speak myanmar language,ties to our culture and most importantly loyal to country

The fact is undeniable that they are Begladesh origins and we never known so called Rohingya before 1960.If they still using that created name, they are still foreigner as because our citizenship law approved to those who born from generation before 1948.

Basically, you are saying that they should assimilate.
That's not a nice thing to ask from any ethnic group. of course they should learn local language and contribute to local life. But no one should tell a group how to identify itself.
Burma is big, it has a lot of diversity. Rohingyas only make up a small portion of the population. If you live outside Arakan, it's possible you never heard of Rohingyas for a long time. But the Rakhaines and Rohingyas had been having trouble since before the Second World War.
Bangladesh (then-East Pakistan), on the other hand, never had to deal with Rohingya population since the British era. We had some Burmese origin people whom we called 'Mogh'. But we came to know the Rohingya when Burma started en mass expulsion in the 1980s.
I believe you have every right to protect and celebreate burmese identity. But Rohingyas are an undeniable fact from your past interaction with the British and British India. Like Karens and other oppressed groups, no one should be asked to disappear in the mainstream culture.

As I explained our immigration law again and again, foreigners ( Chinese, Bengladeshi, Indian )before 2nd WW enjoy as Myanmar citizen. We called them Myanmar (muslim ) or Myanmar Chinese. Finish.

The issue is for those group settled illegally after 1948. Both Bengla and Myanmar deny them to be their nationality. We must look at from Human Right perspective as well as sovereignty, national security, cultural harmony.

1) It doesn't sound plausible that any Muslim would want to leave Pakistan at least for several years after 1947.
Pakistan was created with a specific mandet of catering to Muslims, and Chittagong wasn't a bad place to live in the late 1940s. I would say that after 1950s borders were gradually shutting down as Pakistan was consolidating itself. Only an outmigration of non-Muslims was encouraged.

2) Rohingyas claim that a lot of people who had been living since before 1948 failed to get appropriate papers as they weren't educated (and therefore did not get a chance to learn the state language..... question: what's the state language and is it different from Arakanese?). A lot of people also failed to get papers simply because of the untrusting tendency of government officials who didn't like Rohingyas to spread in their country/state. These people and their chindren and grandchildren became illegal through unfair procedure.

3) Let me also add that Bangladesh has some stateless people. Those who have been living here since birth can now claim citizenship. I understand how bad it feels when former enemies (these people facilitated/participared in mass murder during the liberation war and were targeted in counter-violence after the war) lodge a claim to your country, especially if they have an alien culture, and threaten to multiply without assimilating. And yet, you and I cannot ask them to seek somewhere else after three or more generations of residence. Where would they go?
You might think Rohingyas are very similar to Bangladeshis, but that's not true. They are alien to us. Just as our stateless people would now be alien and unwelcome to the land of their ancestors.

Pakistan was created solely with the mandate of being the Muslim nation. Why would people leave it for a hostile (since the riots) Burma?

2) What of the people who had been living in Burma since before 1948 and failed to get papers?

Most illegal Rohingyas claim that their forefathers failed to get papers as they didn't go to school and learn the state language, or as the government officials in charge were unfavourable. In that case, the people marked as post-1948 are not illegal at all, but unfairly labeled as such.

You might think these people would be able to come in Bangladesh and simply become Bangladeshi. But that's unlikely. They are aliens to us and they are unfriendly toward the ancient families of Bangali Buddhists, which is unacceptable. They have not gone through the essential nation-building process that we went through since 1971 (and the movements before) and have nothing in common with us except the religion and even then the fundamentalist kind of Islam they practice isn't coherent with the (comparatively) humanist tone of Islam in Bangladesh.
In short: it's Burma's problem and instead of simply cleaning up the country by throwing people to the sea, Burma should try to deal with it. In any case, we shouldn't be expected to bear the fallout of your problems. We have problems (as well as non-Bangali stateless peoples) of our own.

Mahmud
The open item I notice is that you say that You are not blind top Muslim atrocities.
However, in your comments area , I do not see a single comment that add addresses any such issues.
Would you please show me where you show any concern at Muslim atrocities???
It needs to be on this newspapers' blog so it can be traced.

eline74in reply to Bharat ppNov 5th, 01:49
Why not? The local university has Muslim students, people from both SE Asia and the subcontinent make their homes here, I see no reason why the Rohingya .
.....
Don't apologise - We all say the things that make good our image.
Your welcome of these people wears thin, knowing full well that there is an anti immigration debate going on over there.
At this point in time, most of your fellow countrymen wouldn't let a fly into the country if it didn't have the necessary skills.
So for you it is so easy to say these things knowing that nothing would happen..
I love kids too, so long as I can give them back to their parents.

Actually, I did forget the political situation in this country--thank you for reminding me.

If you look up the Wikipedia article Immigration in the United States and go to Legal Issues, you'll get a broad overview of the rules. We are, as of the writing of that article, still taking immigrants--asylum seekers included.

We are, as of the writing of that article, still taking immigrants--asylum seekers included.

And of course you will have taken a lot of Rohingyas in as well.

Why do I doubt you folks??

I am sorry - I forgot about your dislike of Latino immigration, and all the measures you have taken against that.

I also forgot that the USA had made a public offering of taking at least 100 Rohingyas in - just before the election

I am so sorry for being so stupid.

Incidentall We are, as of the writing of that article, still taking immigrants--asylum seekers included.People in Australia have also offered to take more refugees per capita t hen the USA.

Incidentally we were actually pushing the boats out of our waters, and watching some of them sink with the people.

Where were you then ?

But we are trying to stop the boat people.
and are now sending them off to the Islands, and some of the Hazarias are actualy deported back to Afghanistan where they will probably get killed
The Europeans do not want a bar of it.

And the Malaysians actually pushed their boats out to see as soon as they saw the boats.
Why isn't Bangladesh offering any help at all - not even towards being a mediator ?

Why has no-one offered any help
\
Not even you!... and as for the Hazarias - I personally would have liked to save them... BUT where were you?

Here is a Comparison with the difference in behavior between different countries

(1) Can any one born in Saudi Arabia get citizenship there?
Same question for any of those Gulf Countries.
(2) Why does Pakistan have a different law to us? In 1972 they wanted to force all the Bangladeshi to speak in Urdu only. In fact they ended up killing 4 million people in the process, and refusing a fairly elected Prime Minister his office in the state.

It would seem that you feel it is fair when Muslim Countries behave the way want to - but the rest of must let rape and killings go.

This article is not about a comparative discussion of Muslim and non-Muslim states vis-a-vis citizenship rights. This is about Burma's Rohingyas. What other Muslim countries have done should have no bearing on the situation in Burma. If Saudi Arabia and Pakistan treated its citizens (or other people) badly, that doesn't mean Muslims in Burma should be punished. Rohingyas should be discussed only in the context of their own history, or that of Burma's.
I don't see why I should have to explain my personal position to a random person online, or answer for the activities of people in other countries in general. But I'll do that once for the sake of politeness.
I am not aware of Saudi Arab's citizenship laws. As a Bangladeshi, I have deep emotion regarding the three million deaths in 1971 by Pakistan army. That does not mean that I cannot perceive Burmese Rohingyas to be victims in a poorly-constructed citizenship law.
You don't care about the fairness regarding Burma or Rohingyas. You seem to have some deep-seated hatred for all Muslims in the world. If you have any information on Rohingyas that you wish to share, please do so. Otherwise, I am not replying to soothe your communal hatred or anger.

This is not the right way to address a problem. Of course the world's population should care for the evicted and expelled. That being said, we can't just keep accepting people being driven away from rogue countries until all that is left is the demographic of their liking. Giving asylum is a temporary measure and should be viewed as such. I'd like to know what happened to the 'responsibility to protect' and the 'coalition of the willing' and other rhetotic-pushers. Why isn't the world forcing a genocidal state/people to stop? It is because Rohingyas are not geopolitically significant, whereas Burma is standing on a very lucrative sea transit.

mahmuda97in reply to Bharat ppNov 8th, 18:19
This article is not about a comparative discussion of Muslim and non-Muslim states vis-a-vis citizenship rights.
.....
mahmuda97in reply to slmarNov 4th, 16:46
I have two question to that:
1) Why would any Muslim leave Pakistan after 1947?
...
Two points
The first is a counter to a point that you made - that is all.
The second one is reffering to the fact that these people left Pakistan, from the East after 1947.
At least it would seem so - Because they have not got naturalised, nor attained any legal citizenship..
Their bad luck comes from the fact they identified with Pakistan around 1950.
They seem to rape and kill - similar to Islamic societies elsewhere.... at least from the statics I have seen - and from personal experience.
Over here, the Bikie gangs have been taken over by the Lebanese Muslims - and they are into drugs and criminality in a big way
In fact, when I was young and living in Nairobi, we employed the one Muslim man employable - His brother was the head of the Chicago Gang and their pride and joy was Kidnapping and raping.
Did your Prophet used to do that?
I have read that he did.

You're right--to the extent we deal with asylum seekers separately from normal migrants. Suppose, though, the accepting countries debited them from the offending countries' yearly quotas for as many years as it takes for those sum of those quotas to equal the sum of refugees? A country with a habit of using emigration to get rid of excess population will quickly find itself stuck with an underemployed, angry populace whose support they could once count on. Suppose, furthermore, most or all exceptions were made only for wealthy entrepreneurs and people with skills their home country will miss? The economic pain becomes more acute. Make early elimination of the 'migration sanction' possible only with improvements in their behavior such that some portion of the refugee population decides to return--debt reduced on a one-to-one basis in the same way it was accrued.

Accepting asylum seekers then becomes, not just a humanitarian gesture, but a means of encouraging other governments to take better care of their people.

That becomes an argument on the merits of freedom to emigrate. This here is about the manner in which a population is forced or at best pushed to emigrate... or die.
Deeper forces are at play at Rakhaine. The Buddhist-Muslim animosity is being used to clean off land for multinational energy projects. Immigration seems just like the easiest solution, but that is never fair if the recipient country is itself overly populated, and let's also not forget how traumatic unplanned immigration can be, especially if done without compensation.

It is very distressing reading about what is happening in Burma to a minority.
I was disgusted to read some of the posts here which is full of hate insults and without any argument.
Particularly this person Bharat is full of animosity for Islam and is doing little service to the issue.
While the world is fixated on Middle East and the US Elections,the Rohingyas in Burma are going through a mini holocaust.
It was so distressing to read that Ms Su Ky(Noble Laureate) would not only refuse to condemn this well orchestrated mayhem on part of her citizens,she agrees with the persecutors that the Rohingyas are not Burmese citizens.
Many heartless have recommended that the Rohingyas should be shipped en mass to some foreign land.
Are we going to witness a replay of those dark days of 1930s in Europe? I hope and pray not!

The thought occurs - Shouldn't Pakistan take them in?
After all they have, in the past, shown their loyalty to Pakistan.
And there is less then a million of them.. Easy to blend into a population of 170 million.

Did you know, during the history how many buddhists have been deported, tortured and exterminated by the invading muslims? chech the history book and you may find a clue. the tension in Myanmar is not an islotad event but rather one of a chians of tensions between the buddhists and muslim in the south east asia. there are tension in Thailand, in Myanmar, in India and even Tibet. The buddhists are very peaceful people and an ordinary Myanmar people normally donate two thirds of their incomes to the Temple, they wouuldn't do any harm to other people unless feel extremly humiliated.

If the grievance of Rakhaines is justified, even then wholesale extermination of a group cannot be condoned. The ethnocide and the forced eviction must stop, and definitely the roots of tension must be addressed.
Just out of curiosity, are the Buddhists in India and Tibet facing immediate or structural danger from Muslims?
It'd also be great if you can post links about some of the religion dynamics in South East Asia.
Thanks.

Mahmoud ... Extermination can not be condoned. And yet you deny the fact that Pakistan which included Bangladesh killed 15 percent of it's pulsation --amounting. To over 24 million, as well as 4,800,000 Hindus after 1953.

And if the rohingyas are not Pakistani, what are you doing here instead making your presence felt on the Sudan site?
Seems like hypocrisy.

do you know history of subcontinent including all the buddhist dissapearing long before muslim moghul came buddhist were either assimilated orlimn of subcontinent have been killed in partion by india govt through mukti bahini gujjuriots Budhist are not fouind in bodh gaya b/c indi hindu exterminated them in period of Ashoka and lter but much before mughus agol came 500yr and bud repolaced by casteist hinduu

As the history witnesses the worst sufferer nations once win the victory, the Rohyngas are that nation too. These people are worst sufferers of state led pogroms. Once they have the chance to be organized and turn around to withstand the present tyranny, it's not unlike to win victory for staying in Rakhine and its contiguous areas inside Burma in the future. Eventually Burmese government and its sectarian people would be coming in the light to recognize Rohynga’s rights for citizenship as like as they are approaching to bloodletting democracy. Losses banish wild sentiments always.

We do have immigration and citizenship law which granted citizenship to anyone who descend from generation settled in Myanmar before 1948. Our immigration law must be stricter than other country because we are surrounded by over populated country.

This is immigration issue broke out between speedy breeding Bengalis migrant and native Rakhine as same as the case happened in Manipur, India.

Ok, that may be a vaild point: to draw strict citizenship laws when borders were drawn (I assume year 1948 has some such significance?).
Rohingyas, as far as I've read, complain that they did not get a fair chance to avail that law. They were uneducated, lacked proper papers etc, as well as suffered due to the rejection tendency of unsympathetic government officials in the backgdrop of sectarian violence during and after the Japanese bombing of Burma started. These, too, seem to be valid claims.

Actually, to clarify, full Burmese citizenship is offered ONLY to persons whose forebears lived in Burma before 1823. This is reflected in both the 1982 and 1948 citizenship laws.

Citizenship by naturalization is offered to "persons who have entered and resided in the State anterior to 4th January, 1948, and their offsprings," along with stipulations such as the ability "to speak well one of the national languages," a qualification that many Rohingya lack.

In the same way as the Rohingyas the government is now oppressing the Kamen Muslims too. It is very clear the Burmese government is rancorous against Muslims and the government led pogroms are not aiming Rohingyas alone, but widely against Muslims. Many cultural heritages of Muslims from SE are still in Rakhine state which was all along ruled by sovereign kings. Historically it is not an integral part of Burma.

guest-iniselein reply to slmarNov 1st, 16:31
dont speak nonsense. Rohyngas migrated to Burma long before 1948. And nobody in their right mind would leave Bangladesh to live in Burma
...
One should always compare - their laws in Burma can be compared to the laws in Saudi Arabia - where you need to be a Muslim before the minister even thinks about discretion.

what about those propaganda in my usa about fake Dalai Lama Budhist turns out worse burni ltte and now rohynga then killing heidiously themselves violently and aour for faker peace more gruesowefull disgusting behavimkillers

what about those propaganda in my usa about fake Dalai Lama Budhist turns out worse killers of tamil ltte in sri lanka and now rohynga then killing heidiously themselves violently and your for fake peace more gruesom full disgusting behaving killers alaround recently Rohynga

One point stands out - This is a cultural problem - Not a racial problem.
The fact that they have protested in the past, very peacefully, against some very violent reaction by the Government sets their record as very peaceful people, in times of deliberations

However even they are can get just as angry as you and I - especially when their hospitality is abused.

And so let me expose their culture - They come from a Pakistani cultutre, where the rules were always set by West Pakistan.
.
HERE IS AN ARTICLE BY ALI ETIRAZ OF THE GUARDIAN
.
:at the founding of Pakistan, Hindus comprised nearly 15% of the country’s population and now number barely 2%. Many have left, many have been killed, and many have converted to other religions to protect themselves. All in all, a travesty for a state
..................
OR this one:
:Ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Pandits
See also: History of Kashmiri Pandits
In the Kashmir region, approximately 300 Kashmiri Pandits were killed between September 1989 to 1990 in various incidents.[45] In early 1990, local Urdu newspapers Aftab and Al Safa called upon Kashmiris to wage jihad against India and ordered the expulsion of all Hindus choosing to remain in Kashmir.[45] In the following days masked men ran in the streets with AK-47 shooting to kill Hindus who would not leave.[45] Notices were placed on the houses of all Hindus, telling them to leave within 24 hours or die.[45]

Since March 1990, estimates of between 250,000 to 300,000 pandits have migrated outside Kashmir[citation needed] due to persecution by Islamic fundamentalists
.......
The second quote is from Wikepedia.

Pakistan, and in effect Rohingya Culture is Propaganda based. THey have no idea that they have lost every war
- Nor do they understand that their Primary school books are full hate and guns, and have no standing in reality.

They hide their women behind veils, and so it is tempting for these boys/men to rape and kill Myanmaree girls.

The Islamic record all over the world speaks for itself.

A culture born of shame, denial , and propaganda and 'Some-one else's fault'
The shame for all tis killin

I am in no way to attempting to stifle debate on this subject (particularly becaus emy expertise lie outside South Asia) but Banyan must start policing this site. Calling any group of people "dogs" or suggesting that its unfortunate that "Mohammed was born" is grossly inapporpriate. We can discuss reptration and forced relocation and the issues that the 100+ ethinc/religious grops in Burma have without this drivel. If you are going to write about respecting humans, you can start by ensuring everyone this site does. You had to have know this would happen with an article like this.

Yep, it's a bit irritating how the comments devolve into insults. There's nothing wrong with discussing the state of Islam around the world, since religion certainly is playing a role here and in most other trouble spots. Calling people animals and other unnecessary bulls**t though is fairly idiotic.

I apologise. There are simply not enough hours in the day to police the comments on everything on this site, or others I have written on, to report all the unacceptable comments. I am going through it now. Thank you for alerting me to these remarks.

There is only one person who has hijacked your article with hate speach and is openly cheerleading the murder and ethnic cleansing you reported. If you have any professional dignity you will make it an urgent priority to remove and exclude this person from comments here: Bharat1 and Bharat pp (same vile little man I presume)

Don't worry Banyan. I have already made a complaint to the police about the racist hate speech you are allowing to be posted here. Its not very difficult to bar one individual who is consistently and regularly spouting racist offensive nonsense.

If the BNP had the vile disgusting comments you are offering a protective platform to, there would be uproar.

TD112in reply to Banyan - The EconomistNov 4th, 22:42
Don't worry Banyan. I have already made a complaint to the police about the racist hate speech you are allowing to be posted here.
....
DO you want any help from a witness?
Although I am only an animal - and my evidence is inadmissible in your Sharia court.

I really cannot understand the fuss in the West about these illegals. The Burmese government and people are prepared to call a spade a spade -however unpalatable that may be. he Rohingyas are bangladeshis and need to be treated as such and sent back.
As compared to Burma, India has suffered much more from Bangladeshi infiltration. Unfortunately we have a Congress govt which has historically welcomed them as vote banks . This has resulted in h many of us becoming minorities in our own states ,with the Federal Govt as a willing accessory and provider to these illegals.

According to history, Rakhines(Mogs) origin from Mongolia in 957 AD in Arakan and Rohingyas origin from India, Arabs,Persian and Turk in 788 AD in Arakan. Why doing things stupid, fighting, arguing with each other!And making dividers job easier. "Dividers objectives: To polarize these ethnic groups to keep these ethnic groups from uniting together and exploit their cultural differences, in this way we can maximize our global agenda, we can minimize any global threats from them." No one will remain in this world! Soon or later everyone must die! Only the devils can do such kind of cruelty like Burmans and Rakhines doing against Rohingya.

Obviously you have never been to North east India.This would stop you pontificating.. the relentless encroachment of illegal Bangladeshis has made many of us a minority in our own lands.What rankles more is that our own e government does nothing about it- and panders to this swarm of locusts- who have spread as far afield as Bombay .
. Kudos to the Burmese for taking a firm stand with these Bangladeshis masquerading as Burmans.

There is indeed economic migration from Bangladesh to India. It's not fair to judge the Rohingyas using that thought-framework. Their history is completely different. It is more than a problem of immigation. It's a problem of intolerance with a particular group of new(er) immigrants. They are truly stateless now, as they aren't historically Bangladeshis either. A large group of people moved back and forth between Britsh Bengal and Burma. Things got dicy when the British started playing with local population during the second world war. Once you have lived in a country for three or more generations, you belong to that country. bangladesh has Rakhain population and descendents of Burmese migrants in Chittaging districts. They are Bangladeshi. Rohingyas are Burmese.

"Correction: The above article was amended on October 29th 2012 to correct errors in the number of Rohingyas repatriated from Bangladesh in 1992 and 1993. Human Rights Watch has reported the forced repatriation of some 50,000 Rohingya refugees to Burma during this time."

hu? 50,000 Rohingyas were repatriated, against their wishes, FROM Bangladesh TO Burma?

At time of partition, there were a lot of people sent back and forth between Pakistan and Hidustan... but Rohingyas are Burmese, there is no Rohingya in Bagladesh, just like there is no latino in latin america, no chinky in south west China....etc.

'Pray Allah' is the only thing common between most Bangladeshis and Rohingyas. You cannot judge by that.
In Chittagong, you can clearly differentiate between a Rohingya (for his Arakanese dialect and different way of clothing)and a local.

Quote
About 30,000 refugees are reported to have fled Bangladeshi camps to avoid repatriation to Burma. "We are worried by the sudden spate in slipping out, especially after Rangoon signed an agreement on Friday allowing the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees to supervise repatriation of the Rohingya Muslims on their side", one Bangladeshi official said (Reuters, 11/08/93). Some 46,000 refugees have returned home since the repatriation began in September, 1992.

Houshuin reply to Bharat1.Oct 31st, 04:06
At time of partition, there were a lot of people sent back and forth between Pakistan and Hidustan.
..
Well Honshu - These things happen in a time of Chaos and anger

What happened post partition to bring the Population of Hindus down from 15-20% to 1% is what really bothers me

Besides sitting in an armchair, and judging others - especially the Angry Burmese, HAVE you ever got up and done something to help people in real need - People who are being hurt by other Muslims.

See if you talk some sense into International Criminals, such as OMAR AL-BASHIR... A MAN WHO CONTINUOUS TO KILL OTHERS DELIBERATELY.

Or perhaps try to protest against Assad. or Even against the Taliban. And don't forget that the Taliban are the same culture as The Rohing yas.
They hide their women under veils, so that the men can go and rape others.

Please stand and let me know if you been anything but an armchair judge??? Specially the Muslims - the people of a peaceful religion.

I notice that I stand alone against the real criminals. I also do not judge the anger of others.
\
In Hitler's time there were only a few who stood up.... BUT none against... Omar Al-Bashir or Hafiz Mohammed Saeed. Definitely no Muslim...
\
And one can hear the deadly silence from the Pakistani Muslims now
... And the abuse, with no reason or points from THAT armchair diabetic PARDESI.
STill silent
!!\

It is pertinent to point out that Hitler was very popular for a while in India and a major Indian political party had a program of nominating a supporter as dictator (read Hitler). The supporter would be jailed by the British, only to find yet another one a week later. This was endorsed by Mohatama Gandhi. One never finds any reference to this in the last 60 years. I would not have known this had I not read a short story about this by S. H. Munto.

I can not say much about Omar Al-Bashir. If he has done something wrong then it is condemnable (the same ought to apply to Bush & Blair).

Now let us come to Hafiz Saeed. I do not agree with him, but since his name has been used by Bharat1 (aka oldfruit2 aka BharatPP, etc...) to slander Pakistan, I feel like an explanation is in order. As I observed elsewhere, Government of India has never provided proof that can stand in a court of law. BTW he does head the most active and efficient humanitarian aid organization. It takes some guts to go against the law and arrest some one like that. GOP even did that a while back and kept him under unlawful arrest for a few months. Courts asked the government to submit proof of his assumed guilt or free him. GOP asked GOI for more proof and got nothing. Eventually he was freed.

You really should not post replies to your comments. It is irritating. Shows that you think you are really important, while most likely other people laugh at your boorishness. It takes a special person like yourself to think that they are doing the world a service by spreading hate. So sad...

zahidiftikharin reply to Bharat1.Oct 31st, 19:50
It is pertinent to point out that Hitler was very popular for a while in India and a major Indian political party had a program of nominating a supporter as dictator (read Hitler).
...
Having been an avid reader of Indian history ( that includes Pakistan) I have never seen any respectable book heed Hitler as a good Character.

So Buddhists do it too. Well, they might as well, since everyone else does it. The Brits have done it, and so have my fellow Americans, the Indians are particularly good at it, and not that the Pakistanis are a slouch by any means. So, what is all the fuss about? Well, I know that Steve Jobs and Richard Gere are Buddhists but they are more the Dalai Lama type of rich Anglo sleek Buddhists. So to the Buddhists, I say, you learnt well from Pol Pot , little grasshoppers.

I still have not heard YOU Muslims + Protesting in the streets against OMAR AL-BASHIR.
because you are SO cowardly about these MUSLIM Criminals :
Do you actually have a right to judge others?
If you do - you have helped the criminals.... maybe you are a criminal yourself

Sitting on your little armchair, happily judging and abusing others who are angry - specially if they are angry at the Muslims.
\\
Turn you eyes away when it is the Muslims killing non-muslims.
Why would you care?
\
It is only the Sunnis killing the shias!
\
Until the Budhists President ( no less) starts to kill Muslims, You don't have to care..
If you think this is too heavy you should read about the Sudanese Arabs killing all the Black Muslims In Darfur.
Then try thinking about Syria - and all the killings there.
And try not talk about Just angry people - Instead get angry about people like Assad, or Somalia, or Sudan, or Afghanistan.
If this is too heavy for you - stop getting on this site, and definitely stop abusing for trying to getting an upper hand.
As my good friend says - Be a man. ( apologies to Russell Peters)

My freind.....3 @ FULGET TAINT
There are those of us who ignore what is going on around us wh en things are going wrong.
As a famous German said recently - The Germans themselves are not bad people, but they did not do anything when Hitler started his campaign.
They thought that he would settle down.
Then when he came to power, he hid all the nasty things. Things such as the killing of the Chief of Staff in Germany. Then came the Crystal Night - and every one was sympathetic to the Nazis.
Nowadays we get people who deny that the Holocaust ever happened. That is why the Jewish people keep their Holocaust Museums.
If they do not keep those memories alive, the dominant deniers will eventually dominate.
It is wrong t o ignore atrocities. However when it comes to Islam, I see so much wrong being done by them, but I see no one doing any thing about it.... Specially not these Pakistan is and Par desi Jat.
And Not even you - Fulgent Taint
I am talking about comparing the unleashed anger of the Burmese with the mass killings that is already happening by the wanted criminal they call Omar Al-Bashir.
The President of Sudan is a 'WANTED' mass killer - BUT not a single Muslim voice is raised against him, and even though he is actually wanted by the European Criminal Court ( and Yet when he visits Saudi Arabia, they applaud him - whilst he is a 'Wanted' criminal)
What have these "Upright' People done about it ?>????
When are these Muslims going to apprehend Omar Al-Bashir and put him on trial??????
Such is Islamic peace - they continue killing and maiming BUT they would only point fingers at Angry Burmese ( Otherwise a very peaceful people)... and Ignore their own Massive killings.
Specially the Muslims..
Perhaps when you stand and be counted in all situations - You will be able to ' LOOK ME IN THE EYE' and ask me to calm down.

There are those of you who condemn this anger of the Burmese ( as many dead as in the storm in New York) .
And yet no one seems to care that Omar Al-Bashir ( except one famous actor) continues to kill millions of Africans, in a very deliberate fashion.
Where are you calm two-faced upright people when this President goes to Saudi Arabia and ,whilst he is wanted as a Criminal, and the Saudis applaud him???
Wher are you people when Hafis Mohammed Saeed, a wanted criminal, is slotted in as a Public speaker in Pakistan, and is revered by Pakistan???
You seem to defend real criminals, but condemn anger.
I would term this to be two-faced schizophrenia.

Choluluain reply to Bharat1.17 mins ago
What the hell has this go to do with atrocities in Sudan ?

..
Gee do I have to spell it out for you?

(1) People who stand up against real atrocities, have a right to judge others. That includes protesting against Saudi Arabia and Sudan.
(2) I am saying to you the same thing that Geert Wilders is also saying : The problem is a cultural problem - and that is why trhe burmese are so angry.
The Muslims tend to rape, and kill

You are not related to Modi, are you? You sound like it. Maybe you are just trying to get yourself promoted from a mere Untouchable to a real Pandit, what? Whatever turns you on, buddy ...... But watch the blood pressure.

PARDESI_JAT in reply to CholuluaOct 31st, 01:18
You are assuming this twit even listens to you. He is stuck in a mind-
...
Unfortunately - with that tiny little brain that you have - You will never be a match for any one else - except through abuse.

"Any online discussion of religion, race, climate change, or sexual preference will require precisely 2 posts to line up 2 opposing sides, and precisely zero points of view will have been altered when the discussion is complete."

Dieter's Law. Let it now go viral. You're welcome.

I may need to revise it a bit; seems the number of posts required to line up two opposing sides is perhaps a half dozen, but the premise still stands.

Why on earth would the opposing sides wish to line up? There is no point in agreeing when one has come to the field with entirely a different justification for the appointed time. Any street psychologist could have told you that. Ever since the TE opened it's hallowed pages to the common people, what did you expect?

Narendra Modi and the BJP being masters when it comes to ethnic violence would no doubt be looking at Burma with satisfaction. Just like India, when it comes to ethnic and religious violence, the authorities in Burma does very little to protect the victims and stop the violence.

I Thought you knew some thing as simple as getting his parliamentary email - It is very easy

As for his Cell Phone and his living address - He changs it every night, because he has been threatened b y the peaceful religion?
\
That is right - He has never ever threatened any one - BUT HE lIVES IN FEAR OF HIS LIFE BECAUSE THE MUSLIMS HAVE THREATEN NED HIM